I liked it. It didn't strive to do too much and what it did it did well. Wacky comedy, gross at times, but justifiable in overall context. Not for the academy awards movie watchers, but if you like to run with its coyness, a good time will be had by all. You will forget this urban comedy after you view it, but while you are viewing it, a fun, manic, movie.

Bobby (Vincent Gallo), a very successful national television talk show host, stationed in Los Angeles, is having a near-breakdown. He begins asking very inappropriate questions to a beautiful female guest and, shortly after, takes a leave of absence. What is really bothering Bobby is that, long ago and far away, his name was Kevin and he gave up a nice relationship with Lily (Courteney Cox) to pursue his professional ambitions. Lily, who lives in New York City, is living with a jerk (Tate Donovan) and is still seething from Bobby's rejection, even though she watches Bobby's show consistently. But, she also has other problems to deal with, including a mentally ill brother and an eccentric mother (Anne Meara). When Bobby/Kevin comes home to the Big Apple and tries to contact her, will she answer his calls? This film has some very good messages about life and a fine cast. Gallo and Cox are attractive folks who command attention from the viewer, with Meara doing a nice job, too. Add on some good-looking costumes, sets, and production values and you have an eye-catching film. However, even though the script has its heart in the right place, that is, one should never choose success over personal happiness, it employs way too much bad language for comfort, in my opinion. Too bad one can not choose the "clean version" of a film, as one can do when buying a music CD. In any case, if you love romance and/or lesser-known films of quality, this is a good choice. But, if bad language offends you, you should go with something else, such as Return to Me.

Sorry,this is by machine translation.They are the appendix of this movie, and a contribution review, "Also in gold and an appointment, a certain men are them. which was visible to a work called the degree of the second 3 as for the love story which throws away and goes to a sweetheart's basis". (an overseas review is too) which was seeing performance "able to fit in and smile at a jar" etc. however a story, performance, etc. -- natural -- although they are considered to even [ of an interesting element / "even" ] if it is in a story or a division called performance -- others -- without limit -- " -- it -- . with the movie measure" -- I feel that I am not so common as it tidies up at a comedy or a nonsense word noisily again, either.then -- if it says where was interesting -- "how to exist" . -- then, I was interesting as a movie of what kind of "how to exist" -- I am . -- if it says simply [ of a movie ] As . whose "laughter" <=> "serious" and "insanity" <=> "senses" most point ., i.e., "serious" scenes, of "having been perverted" is "laughter" on almost all scenes, and is serious [ the scene of "laughter" / which is not attached with actualities and I do not leave / "serious" ], and a sight "senses" the characters to serve -- in fact --. whose place which should have slightly sad" disposition which was out of order, or should become serious [ that / at which I cannot laugh / "serious" ] but "was amusing" only in extremely. fine as this is drawn on the basis of a certain fixed law like expression -- I think that this law can also do how to catch the "necessity" for making it not entwined by conditions.About "necessity", the words of an audience rating so and so near the last are symbolic, "Distinction" with common TV drama (TV media) . . "a reason is intelligible" prepared or whose "a reason is not known" are not "the amusingness which a reason does not understand", either -- visible way . that a focus is in the place where the focus shifted just for a moment in fact -- the place (at the time) where "focus shifted when saying more "if", a focus is not in sight" -- on a movie [ like ], it does not have the division which laps also with my "reality" -- I am . complication of "laughter" <=> "serious" and "insanity" <=> "senses" which crazy each one of the insane asylum of people who divide and come out and are in not only the leading role's Vincent Gallo but old her surroundings, or a supporting player to say shows / . which sensed fun for >> when inverted -- this -- how [ "movie ] -- if it says without hiding although it is feel " reality ". with a certain independent nature, I will say whether having seen with a favorable eye from before seeing Vincent Gallo who has originality of enough only by a face has the "focus" at the time of offering "only one interpretation" of a movie in the place whose manufacturer of this work is the television persons concerned surely in itself -- enjoying -- a way -- the bottom.

Where a lot of romantic comedies fall down is that you can not for one believe for one moment that the couple won't actually end up together, no matter what obstacles are tossed in their path. The truimph of Get Well Soon is that it casts Vincent Gallo, best know for playing a variety of sociopaths and oddballs, as the lead male. Just like in Buffalo 66, the Gallo character is so fundamentally self-destructive that you can really believe he's going to mess this up and it's almost a relief when he doesn't. Likeable supporting characters and a good performance from Cox, it's a shame this movie didn't get more recognition. Or indeed, any at all.